Difference between howard zinn and paul johnson

Zinn and Johnson's books raise the fundamental issue of whether one's political ideology can have an overriding view on the depiction of historical events. Zinn was a self-professed leftist and believer in Marxist ideology. Johnson was a conservative and believer in the principles of the Enlightenment. It is not surprising that their respective works should present a far different picture of the American people.

Zinn's work reads less like history and more like a hit-piece. Zinn...

Zinn and Johnson's books raise the fundamental issue of whether one's political ideology can have an overriding view on the depiction of historical events. Zinn was a self-professed leftist and believer in Marxist ideology. Johnson was a conservative and believer in the principles of the Enlightenment. It is not surprising that their respective works should present a far different picture of the American people.

Zinn's work reads less like history and more like a hit-piece. Zinn claims that his work was to show no respect for "elites" but unfortunately it seeks to deride the very people he claims to represent. Small groups are often portrayed as the majority while mundane but important events are left out. Zinn's work has been highly criticized by historians for a cut-and-paste depiction of historical events. That is, he picks certain events to fit his narrative of oppression while leaving vast quantities of historical material out. 

Johnson's work is more of the classical history: He starts with a series of questions and then seeks to address those questions through the historical record. In this, he is far more successful and intellectually honest. No history of any people is all rosy but looking at both the good and bad he fulfills the historian's duty of accuracy to the people and events he is describing. 

So why is Zinn so widely assigned in universities? To answer that we need to understand the his political philosophy is the standard held throughout most universities today. Further, many humanities departments have ceased presenting both sides of the debate and favor those works that fit in with their political ideology. Zinn fits that bill. But it should also be noted that Zinn's work is often assigned in non-history classes such as cultural studies and ethnic studies, whereas Johnson's work is found in actual history classes. That should give you some indication as to how they are viewed as historical works.